WATCH: Kermit Gosnell's House of Horrors

Full Transcript:

I have to tell you, this is the most disturbing show that I think I’ve ever done.  This is some of the most disturbing information that I have seen and some of the most disturbing pictures I have ever seen, and I, you know, the last five years have studied the Holocaust and Auschwitz, so I’m not shocked by an awful lot anymore, unfortunately.  But I am shocked by what I’m going to show you tonight.

The old saying in TV news is “if it bleeds, it leads,” right?  But in a trial of abortion Dr. Kermit Gosnell, the media has shown sudden, incredible restraint at best, despite this, a 261-page report from a grand jury that is so shocking, horrifying, tragic, gut wrenching, tells you an awful lot about who we’re dealing with, not just with the doctor, but also society.  It is filled with details that make Hannibal Lecter look like Mother Teresa, and the media is just not interested.

I mean, they couldn’t get enough of Sandra Fluke’s plea for government-funded condoms.  They went full-throttle after the Susan G. Komen Foundation said they’re not going to give money for the abortion clinics of Planned Parenthood.  Tonight’s episode is going to make you just so proud to support Susan G. Komen.

Somehow, the news media just couldn’t see their way to news, any worthiness of a story about this man, Kermit Gosnell, and his murder clinic.  It was described with a TV-friendly headline “house of horrors.”  That’s what they call it in the grand jury report.  For over 20 years, Dr. Gosnell ran a multimillion-dollar abortion mill.  He got rich off routinely snipping the necks of the babies.  Don’t put this up yet, please.

I am going to show you beginning here some horrifying pictures.  This is your last warning to get the kids out of the room, stop, watch it later, or turn this off, but I think it is important, especially if you’re on the fence about whether it’s a baby or not.  Go ahead and show this.  Snipping the necks of babies…this is the back of a neck of one of the babies, and I’ll tell you which baby this was here in just a minute.  But this is the back of a baby’s head.

This was Gosnell’s term for jamming scissors, snipping, scissors into the back of the neck and cutting their spinal cord.  He also severed the babies’ feet, and he kept the feet in jars in the office.  Witnesses testified that the babies were moving, they were breathing, they were screeching.  Another witness testified they personally saw the doctor snip the necks of more than 30 babies.  Yet another said she had to kill the baby that was delivered in a toilet by cutting its neck with scissors.

He literally was able to convince people, and it doesn’t seem apparently that it was that hard to convince people in Philadelphia that worked for him that it was okay to kill a living, breathing, moving baby because, “It’s the baby’s reflexes.”  That’s all.  “It’s not really moving.”  Don’t worry about it.  As if killing the baby moments before in the womb was somehow or another better, so I guess you’ve already made your line.

We are talking about the cold-blooded murder of innocent babies.  Many were 20, or 25, or even 30 weeks along in the pregnancy.  I have to tell you, I see some of these pictures, and I see my children.  Now, that’s well past the 24-week limit.  One 30-week-old baby he aborted was nothing more than a punch line to him.  He joked that the baby was so big he could’ve walked her to the bus stop – that baby.

That baby was breathing and moving when born.  And he said, boy, your baby is so big, he could walk me to the bus stop, and he snipped the neck.  He took this baby and then just matter-of-factly threw him in a shoebox with the arms and legs lifelessly hanging over the edges.  This is Baby Boy B.  They found his body frozen in a one-gallon spring water bottle.  He was at least 28 weeks when he was killed.

“Baby C was moving and breathing for 20 minutes before an assistant came in and cut the spinal cord.”  She did it just the way she had seen the good doctor do it so many times.  And then the report goes on to the Sunday babies, the Sunday babies, “’the really big ones,’ that even he was afraid to perform in front of others.”  By the way, did I tell you that this is a black doctor, and he wasn’t doing this to white women because he said that white women would most likely complain and so he’d get in trouble.  So he was just keeping it to African-American and minority women.  This was Margaret Sanger’s dream come true, Progressives.

He said the really big ones he was afraid to perform in front of others.  These abortions were scheduled for Sundays – oh, he stayed with the Lord’s day – a day when the clinic was closed and none of the regular employees were present.  The only person allowed to assist with these special cases was his wife.  The files for these patients were not kept at the office.  Gosnell took them home with him and disposed of them.  We may never know the details of these cases.  We do know, however, that during the rest of the week, Gosnell routinely aborted and killed babies in the sixth and seventh month of pregnancy.  The Sunday babies were bigger still.

They described the facility as – as quite interesting, “scattered throughout, in cabinets, in the basement, in a freezer, in jars and bags and plastic jugs, were fetal remains.  It was a baby charnel house.”  He slaughtered hundreds, possibly thousands of children.  This is the biggest, bloodiest, mass murderer in the history of our country.  This guy is far, far worse than anything, anything that Jeffrey Dahmer did, far worse, any of the mass murderers, serial killers.

The media doesn’t cover it.  Well, they didn’t cover it until they were shamed into it.  The media would be more interested, I guess, if he would’ve used an AR-15 to ensure fetal demise as he called it.  About the only media attention was this story reporting on how little attention the story was actually receiving.  A columnist from Bucks County, PA, J.D. Mullane, one of the few actually covering the event.  He snapped, this is the most damning photo for the press at a recent courtroom hearing.

Those seats are reserved for the various members of the press, three rows of seats to accommodate 40 reporters.  Mullane was the only reporter to attend, along with one from the New York Times who showed up later in the day and stayed for maybe five minutes.  The trial began nearly a month ago on March 18, but NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, no, they didn’t cover that at all.  They covered it last week.  The question is why?

Well, I want you to know I don’t think it’s some conspiracy theory to avoid the story or anything like that.  I think it’s a lack of intuitive interest from the press that betrays their beliefs.  You see, abortion is not wrong to the people in the press, it’s not wrong.  I mean, it’s not really a big deal.  The White House press conference today, Jay Carney was asked about Gosnell, and here’s what he said.  I want you to listen to this carefully.

Jay Carney:  I’ll say two things. One, the president is aware of this. Two, the president does not and cannot take a position on an ongoing trial, so I won’t as well.

Oh my gosh, how about Trayvon?  Let me ask you this – boy would I like to use some names.  This president during the health care debate accused doctors of cutting the feet off of patients for an extra 30 grand.  Do you remember that?  And I said where is the evidence?  Give me one case, where’s the evidence?  Nothing, and the press went on and reported those lies over and over again.  And yet he has nothing to say about this doctor who literally has feet in jars, and the president can’t speak out about it.

Oh, he does care about healthcare so much, doesn’t he?  He cares about the American people and making sure that we don’t have another Mengele.  You see, the left isn’t outraged that 25 week-year-old babies are terminated or 25-week babies are terminated, because it’s completely legal the week before.  So if you’re totally cool with an unborn baby being terminated as you would call it at 24 weeks, why are you appalled when they’re terminated seven days later?

Perhaps the scariest part of this entire story, the thing that concerns me the most, is what Gosnell convinced others to do.  He convinced people, apparently it wasn’t too hard either, to look at a living, crying, moving baby and slit its neck and murder it.  “Over the years, there were hundreds of ‘snippings.’  Sometimes if Gosnell was unavailable, the ‘snipping’ was done by one of his fake doctors, or even by one of the administrative staff…”  Really, you go from licking stamps to killing babies? 

“Everyone there acted as if it wasn’t murder at all.”  Well, of course they didn’t think it was murder.  Of course they didn’t think it was murder.  They’re a week late.  What have they been indoctrinated with for so long?  That’s not a life in the womb; that’s a woman’s choice.  She can do whatever she wants with it.  We’ve just heard over and over and over again how it’s just nothing but tissue in there.  It’s just a collection of cells.  MSNBC calls that a thing.

Well, if you can convince someone to murder an infant in cold blood, of course this is a thing.  Look at the picture.  That ain’t a thing, man.  If you can convince somebody that you can go in and kill that child, a woman can kill that child, and then just, I guess, brush it off and call for the next patient, if you can do that, what can’t you convince them to do?

Let me tell you something, this is a result of a culture that does not value life at all.  For over two decades, hear me, 20 years, Kermit Gosnell convinced people to slit the necks of perfectly healthy babies, several per day, week after week after week, year after year, baby after baby after baby.

Let’s just take this as – the testimony says an average of 15 a day.  Let’s just look for the first decade.  Fifteen a day, that means this man killed more children in a single month than all of the school shootings in the history of America combined, and no one in the media says anything.  But that’s only because they care so much about children.  We have to do something for the collective, you know?

I lived in Philadelphia.  I live in Texas for a reason, but believe me, we’re headed for troubled times.  When a society does not react to these kinds of things, there’s trouble.  When I tell you there will be stories coming out like this over the elderly or the handicapped, go ahead, mock me – the mentally ill, anybody whose quality of life a Progressive deems inadequate or if there’s an emergency, of course.

We’re already talking about – Krugman admitted the death panels, and nobody in the media said a word, and they’re already doing this in the UK.  Now, of course, they’re putting their elderly, 130,000 a year are put on the pathway to death, the death pathway.  Well, it’s being done for a very good reason, of course, out of compassion.  Well, hello, Dr. Mengele. 

Today is the anniversary of the birth and death of Corrie ten Boom.  Please, please read about Corrie ten Boom.  Please, reevaluate, because we need to stand.  The media is naturally recoiling from this story because it shines a bright light on exactly what it means to be pro-choice.  Sure, most abortion doctors aren’t as flippant about it.  They kill the baby in the womb so you don’t, you know, you don’t see the baby moving around and crying.  It doesn’t cause any trauma.  But whether this is in the house of horrors or in the best hospital in America, the end result is the same, a real child dies.  A life ends.  That’s it, period.

You can call it whatever you want, but that’s the truth, and the truth shall set you free.  Now that people are catching on, the media is scrambling to cover its tracks.  How about the hospitals, are they covering their tracks?  Because hospitals were involved in this.  This one I love.  This one is from NBC news:  “The story is on our radar.”  Really?  How about this from CBS:  “CBS has been working the story...”  Oh, I bet you have.

CBS Evening News – Sunday, first time they reported on it.  Washington Post got pissy.  They admitted that he wasn’t aware of the story.  Watch this one, wasn’t aware of the story until the readers began e-mailing about it.  “I wish I could be conscious of all stories everywhere, but I can’t be, nor can any of us,” says Martin Baron, Washington Post Executive Director.  Oh well, thank you.  You sound humble.

Even Headline News, a network that I believe is 80% Nancy Grace and the other court-related shows, they’re not even bothering to cover this case.  Well, this is a fascinating case.  In the interest of being fair and straight up with you, we didn’t cover it, either, at least not right away.  I don’t have affiliate stations in every market in the country.  I don’t have a massive staff.  It’s our job to get it right.

It’s our job, so I won’t use that staff or anything else as an excuse.  That is why when the trial started on March 18, TheBlaze didn’t have any coverage of it until March 19, the day after the trial began.  Where were the reporters that I know for a fact read TheBlaze every single day?  Where were they?

At the risk of sounding crass, help us grow.  We will not miss the story of the biggest serial killer in American history, and for another thing, people don’t progress.  They might as individuals over their lifetime, but we all start at the beginning with good or evil, and it is up to each of us as individuals to decide, not the collective.  The collective doesn’t decide.  We don’t progress as a collective; we do as individuals.

Tell me, tell me this isn’t the American Mengele, and no other network would dare say that, no other network.  Every other network would chastise me for saying it on the air.  Amen, brother, this guy’s a monster.  And nobody will say it because whether it’s left or right, you are not getting the truth.  You’re getting a political agenda, and that agenda too many times is the collective right over the individual right.

And you’ll notice when the media will tell this story, they will not show you the pictures I showed.  And maybe they’re making the right decision, but I don’t think so, because those pictures will make you say, Who the hell in the collective is standing up for the individual child?

The themes of healing and redemption appear throughout the Bible.

Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength. — 1 Corinthians 15:43
It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners. — Mark 2:17.

So, for many Christians, it's no surprise to hear that people of faith live longer lives.

Heal me, O Lord, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved, for you are my praise. — Jeremiah 17:14.

But it is certainly lovely to hear, and a recent study by a doctoral student at Ohio State University is just one more example of empirical evidence confirming the healing benefits of faith and religious belief.

RELATED: MEDIA BIGOTRY: The New Yorker hates on Chick-fil-A over 'pervasive Christian traditionalism'

Moreover, the study finds that religious belief can lengthen a person's life.

A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones. — Proverbs 17:22
Lord, your discipline is good, for it leads to life and health. You restore my health and allow me to live! — Isaiah 38:16

The study analyzed over 1,000 obituaries nationwide and found that people of faith lived longer than people who were not religious. Laura Wallace, lead author of the study, noted that "religious affiliation had nearly as strong an effect on longevity as gender does, which is a matter of years of life."

The study notes that, "people whose obits mentioned a religious affiliation lived an average of 5.64 years longer than those whose obits did not, which shrunk to 3.82 years after gender and marital status were considered."

And He called to Him His twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction. — Matthew 10:1

"The researchers found that part of the reason for the boost in longevity came from the fact that many religiously affiliated people also volunteered and belonged to social organizations, which previous research has linked to living longer. The study provides persuasive evidence that there is a relationship between religious participation and how long a person lives," said Baldwin Way, co-author of the study and associate professor of psychology at Ohio State.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

In addition, the study showed how the effects of religion on longevity might depend in part on the personality and average religiosity of the cities where people live, Way said.

Prayer is good medicine, and faith is a good protector.

And the power of the Lord was with him to heal. — Luke 5:17
Heal the sick in it and say to them, The kingdom of God has come near to you. — Luke 10:9

In early June, the Social Security and Medicare trustees released their annual report on the fiscal health of these programs, and the situation looks dire. Medicare is scheduled to run out of money in 2026 (three years sooner than anticipated), while Social Security is expected to run out in 2034. The rising national debt is only one of the well-known financial struggles the millennial generation faces. The burdens of student loan debt, high housing prices (thanks to zoning restrictions), stagnant wage growth, the rising cost of healthcare and lingering aftershocks of the Great Recession are among the biggest sources of economic anxiety millennials feel.

Progressive politicians have been very successful at courting the youth vote, partly because they actually promote policy ideas that address many of these concerns. As unrealistic or counterproductive as Senator Bernie Sanders' proposals for single-payer health care or a $15 an hour minimum wage might be, they feel in theory like they would provide the economic stability and prosperity millennials want.

RELATED: Time to reverse course: America is being corrupted by its own power

Republicans, on the other hand, have struggled to craft a message to address these concerns. Fiscal conservatives recognize, correctly, that the burden of the $20 trillion national debt and over $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities will fall on millennials. Some conservatives have even written books about that fact. But the need to reform entitlements hasn't exactly caught millennials' attention. Pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson, in her book The Selfie Vote, notes that millennials generally view protecting the safety net as more important than reducing the deficit.

Clearly, Republicans have a problem. They need to craft solutions that address the millennial generation's struggles, but they can't seem to sell entitlement reform, their biggest policy preference that addresses those problems. The Republican approach to wooing millennials on policy is failing because talking about stopping the debt from reaching an unsustainable level is long-term and abstract, and offers few immediate tangible benefits. A new approach to both pave the way for entitlement reform and give millennials an immediate financial boost is to first reform not entitlement spending, but the payroll tax: specifically, by partially (or wholly) replacing it with a value-added tax.

Under the current Social Security model, workers pay for the benefits of current retirees through the payroll tax. This system creates the illusion of a pension program, in which what you put in is what you get out, but in reality Social Security is a universal safety net program for the elderly paid for by taxes. The payroll tax falls on workers and is a tax on labor, while the value-added tax (VAT) is a tax on consumption imposed at every part of the production process. Assuming that this policy change is revenue-neutral, switching to a VAT will shift the responsibility for funding Social Security and Medicare away from workers, disproportionately poorer and younger, and onto everyone participating in the economy as a whole. Furthermore, uncoupling Social Security funding from payroll taxes would pave the way for fiscal reforms to transform the program from a universal benefit program to one geared specifically to eliminating old-age poverty, such as means-testing benefits for high-income beneficiaries, indexing benefits to prices rather than wages or changing the retirement age.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences.

Switching from the payroll tax to the VAT would address both conservative and liberal tax policy preferences. As the Tax Policy Center notes, the change would actually make the tax system more progressive. The current payroll tax is regressive, meaning that people with lower incomes tend to pay a higher effective tax rate than people with higher incomes. On the other hand, the value-added tax is much closer to proportional than the payroll tax, meaning that each income group pays closer to the same effective tax rate.

For Republicans, such a change would fit conservative economic ideas about the long-run causes of economic growth. A value-added tax has a much broader base than the payroll tax, and therefore would allow for much lower marginal tax rates, and lower marginal tax rates mean smaller disincentives to economic activity. According to the Tax Foundation's analysis of a value-added tax, the VAT would be a more economically efficient revenue source than most other taxes currently in the tax code.

Not only would replacing part or all of the payroll tax provide an immediate benefit to millennial taxpayers, it would also open the door for the much-needed entitlement reforms that have been so politically elusive. Furthermore, it would make the tax code both more pro-growth and less regressive. In order to even begin to address the entitlement crisis, win millennial support and stimulate the economy in a fiscally responsible manner, Republicans must propose moving from the payroll tax to the VAT.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate. His writing has appeared in Townhall and The Federalist. He is a federal policy intern at the Tax Foundation. Opinions expressed here are his only and not the views of the Tax Foundation. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Glenn was joined by Alanna Sarabia from "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios on Thursday for an exclusive look at Mercury Museum's new "Rights & Responsibilities" exhibit. Open through Father's Day, the temporary museum features artifacts from pop culture, America's founding, World Ward II and more, focusing on the rights and responsibilities America's citizens.

Get tickets and more information here.

Watch as Glenn gives a sneak peek at some of the unique artifacts on display below.

History at the Mercury Museum

Alanna Sarabia interviews Glenn Beck for "Good Morning Texas" at Mercury Studios.

Several months ago, at the Miss Universe competition, two women took a selfie, then posted it on Instagram. The caption read, "Peace and love." As a result of that selfie, both women faced death threats, and one of the women, along with her entire family, had to flee her home country. The occasion was the 2017 Miss Universe competition, and the women were Miss Iraq and Miss Israel. Miss Iraq is no longer welcome in her own country. The government threatened to strip her of her crown. Of course, she was also badgered for wearing a bikini during the competition.

RELATED: Media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam bias sweeps THIS fact under the rug

In an interview, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, said:

When I posted the picture I didn't think for a second there would be blowback. I woke up to calls from my family and the Miss Iraq Organization going insane. The death threats I got online were so scary. The director of the Miss Iraq Organization called me and said they're getting heat from the ministry. He said I have to take the picture down or they will strip me of my title.

Yesterday, Miss Iraq, Sarah Idan, posted another selfie with Miss Israel, during a visit to Jerusalem.

In an interview, she said that:

I don't think Iraq and Israel are enemies; I think maybe the governments are enemies with each other. There's a lot of Iraqi people that don't have a problem with Israelis.

This is, of course, quite an understatement: Iraq, home to roughly 15,000 Palestinians, refuses to acknowledge Israel as a legitimate country, as it is technically at war with Israel. The adages says that a picture is worth a thousand words. What are we to do when many of those words are hateful or deadly? And how can we find the goodness in such bad situations?